linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] IOATDMA: fix section mismatches

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2007 06:34:02 +0200
From:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, christopher.leech@...el.com,
	akpm <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IOATDMA: fix section mismatches

On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 02:51:47PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
> 
> Rename struct pci_driver data so that false section mismatch
> warnings won't be produced.
> 
> Sam, ISTM that depending on variable names is the weakest & worst part of
> modpost section checking.  Should __init_refok work here?  I got build
> errors when I tried to use it, probably because the struct pci_driver
> probe and remove methods are not marked "__init_refok".

Relying on naming is obviously a bad thing but without doing so
we would have tons of warnings from drivers/

__init_refok is for functions. For this case __initdata_refok
could have worked but to be consistent the renaming is much
better.

	Sam
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/